I have lurked for some time on this forum and own a few of the Mikrotik Switches/Routers now that I have acquired over time. I would like to simplify/yet automate my network config and consolidate into an all Mikrotik configuration if possible.

My current Mikrotik Inventory:
2 x CRS504-4XQ-IN
2 x CRS326+24S+2Q+RM

I am proposing the following:

1) Use the 2 x CRS326+24S+2Q+RM (SwitchOS)
2) Use the 2 x CRS504-4XQ-IN (RouterOS)

Questions:
1) Should I use LACP or MLAG?
2) Should I use RouterOS or SwitchOS for the CRS326's?
3) Eventually I will replace the two CRS504's with a CRS520-4XS-16XQ-RM to expand the number of ports for High-Speed connections like the TrueNAS. Unfortunately, the budget does not quite allow for that right now
4) I have considered using another brand switch for the larger port density any thoughts?
(Note: This is mainly being considered due to the lack of stacking/MLAG full support and issues in the current software.)

See attached simple network diagram.
All recommendations are welcome.

Thanks in Advance

No responses?? Bummer

Hi,
My thoughts as someone who knows virtually nothing about this higher end of the world.

In this instance the 2 * CRS504's seem to add very little to the system apart from cost and complexity.

Perhaps you could contact your local Mikrotik Distributor maybe they would loan you a couple, (or even the 520's) to find how to get it to work properly and if there is any worthwhile improvement. (Also they do seem to know a lot)

If you know routerOS, definitely run that on the CRS326's.
(Unless there is something needed that SwitchOS does correctly but routerOS currently does not, also in this case contact Mikrotik support and mention it to them)

Thanks for your response. Not sure why I have not gotten others?

The 2 x CRS504's add the ability to connect the TrueNAS @ 100gb in a redundant fashion if I can use MLAG/LACP with the CRS326 switches it also makes those redundant across my network. My Firewall also supports LACP (802.3ad) as well so I could bond two ports together but have not yet as I need to test out the MLAG/LACP function.
Supposedly from what i have read in the posts it is possible to do MLAG/LACP configuration across switches for redundancy but I have not seen a sample config yet that shows this

As far as the CRS326 switches I am new but what advantages do I get by keeping them on RouterOS instead of SwithcOS in this configuration?

I am a Cisco guy so just learning Mikrotik and need some help/guidance.

Thanks

I struggle with SwitchOS and find the diagnostics on RouterOS well worth the extra complexity.

For a 2 CRS326 scenario, I was thinking perhaps the 2 ports to the TrueNas could be part of the redundancy scheme.
If not perhaps a 2 cable etherchannel between the 2 CRS's for when the fibre link between them fails.
(Assumes all traffic goes to/from the TrueNas, except internet traffic)

Hi!

It's interesting and exciting stuff you are doing over here
I have only one Mikrotik switch in my topologies and, as you can expect, I don't use it to any kind of redundancy or HA, but I can "throw" some ideas to discuss. More in a theoretical way unfortunatelly.

The connections between two switches and TrueNAS are LACP (on NAS side) and MLAG (on switches side) based. Here is an article about configuration: https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/spaces/R ... tion+Group
The same stands for firewall - switches (not on the diagram but you did mention it).

But the most "juicy" part (redundant connections between 4 switches) won't work this way (as far as I imagine it correctly - if someone knows something more I would be glad to hear and educate myself ). You've got a logical ring topology over here which cannot be obtained with Mikrotiks in a literal sense. You can try to go with MPLS maybe or a dynamic routing protocol? Not sure it is possible on switches though.

But the most "juicy" part (redundant connections between 4 switches) won't work this way (as far as I imagine it correctly - if someone knows something more I would be glad to hear and educate myself ). You've got a logical ring topology ...

No, connections are not forming a ring. Each of the bottom two switches is connected to both top switches ... exactly the same way as TrueNAS ... so a LACP on side of bottom switches and a MLAG on side of top switches.

No, connections are not forming a ring. Each of the bottom two switches is connected to both top switches ... exactly the same way as TrueNAS ... so a LACP on side of bottom switches and a MLAG on side of top switches.

Okay, so the top switches will use the inbetween connection (blue color on schema) also for other LACP/MLAG setups (purple color), I didn't think about it I'm more in Siemens ring redundacy (HRP) + "standby link" configuration at this point so probably that's why I look on the diagram this way.
Thanks for the answer, I'm always happy to get knowledge

EDIT: By "ring topology" I ment the four switches connection (purple), not the whole thing going out.

EDIT: By "ring topology" I ment the four switches connection (purple), not the whole thing going out.

That would be true if the bottom two switches would not have any special configuration of "purple" ports. If those ports are configured as LACP bond, then those ports don't create a ring on lower switches. And yes, the blue interconnect between top switches absolutely has to be properly configured as MLAG peer link.

Regarding link: also TrueNAS (if it supports bridging ports) can create a ring (with top two switches). But if TrueNAS has the two ports configured as LACP bond, ring doesn't get created.

Sorry couldnt get past the router........